In this article we present a model of Hubble-Lemaître law using the notions of a transmitter (galaxy) and a receiver (MW) coupled to a model of the universe (Slow Bang Model, SB), based on a quantum approach of t...In this article we present a model of Hubble-Lemaître law using the notions of a transmitter (galaxy) and a receiver (MW) coupled to a model of the universe (Slow Bang Model, SB), based on a quantum approach of the evolution of space-time as well as an equation of state that retains all the infinitesimal terms. We find an explanation of the Hubble tension H<sub>0</sub>. Indeed, we have seen that this constant depends on the transceiver pair which can vary from the lowest observable value, from photons of the CMB (theoretical [km/s/Mpc]) to increasingly higher values depending on the earlier origin of the formation of the observed galaxy or cluster (ETG ~0.3 [Gy], ~74 [km/s/Mpc]). We have produced a theoretical table of the values of the constant according to the possible pairs of transmitter/receiver in the case where these galaxies follow the Hubble flow without large disturbance. The calculated theoretical values of the constant are in the order of magnitude of all values mentioned in past studies. Subsequently, we applied the models to 9 galaxies and COMA cluster and found that the models predict acceptable values of their distances and Hubble constant since these galaxies mainly follow the Hubble flow rather than the effects of a galaxy cluster or a group of clusters. In conclusion, we affirm that this Hubble tension does not really exist and it is rather the understanding of the meaning of this constant that is questioned.展开更多
It is generally accepted that the history of the expansion of the universe can be exactly described by the concordance model, which makes specific predictions about the shape of the Hubble diagram. The redshift-magnit...It is generally accepted that the history of the expansion of the universe can be exactly described by the concordance model, which makes specific predictions about the shape of the Hubble diagram. The redshift-magnitude Hubble diagram in the redshift range z = 0.0104 - 1 seems to confirm this expectation, and it is believed that this conformity is also valid in the high redshift range. However, this belief is not undisputed. Recent work in the high redshift range of up to z = 8.1 has shown that the shape of the Hubble diagram deviates considerably from the predictions made by the Lambda cold dark matter model. These analyses, however, were based on mixed SN1a and gamma ray burst data, and some astronomers argue that this may have biased the results. In this paper, 109 cosmology-independent, calibrated gamma ray burst z/μdata points are used to calculate the Hubble diagram in the range z = 0.034 to z = 8.1. The outcome of this analysis confirms prior results: contrary to expectations, the shape of the Hubble diagram turns out to be exponential, and this is difficult to explain within the framework of the standard model. The cosmological implications of this unexpected result are discussed.展开更多
This paper discusses the “Hubble constant measurement—mystery”. Independent measurements of this cosmic parameter, referred to as <i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">H</span></i>...This paper discusses the “Hubble constant measurement—mystery”. Independent measurements of this cosmic parameter, referred to as <i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">H</span></i><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> in abbreviated form, have all led to different values, with the highest value ≈ 74 km<span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>s</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>Mpc</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> and the lowest ≈ 67 km<span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>s</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>Mpc</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, where km denotes kilometer, s second and Mpc</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> megaparsec. These measurements have mainly been obtained with space telescopes. Apparently, up to now there was no way to explain the differences. However, previously published studies seem to regard the problem of the different measurement results for </span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">H</span></i><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> [</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><a href="#ref1">1</a>,</span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> </span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><a href="#ref2">2</a></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">]. I have shown that due to a symmetrical expansion of the Minkowski space (SMS), each respective frame of reference for an observer, who rests in the zero point of the frame, is converted into a state of apparent rest relative to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation. This SMS-relativistic effect also seems to be responsible for the different measurement results of the Hubble constant, especially through space telescopes.</span>展开更多
The Hubble equation was considered valid enough to calculate the recession velocity of galaxies, until further observations showed that there would be an accelerated recession in the Hubble flow, necessarily tied to a...The Hubble equation was considered valid enough to calculate the recession velocity of galaxies, until further observations showed that there would be an accelerated recession in the Hubble flow, necessarily tied to an accelerated expansion of the Universe. So, this paper postulates the existence of a Hubble field as a possible cause for such an accelerated expansion, with some conditions: it must be a scalar field whose intensity should be a constant in respect to distance and whose Poisson equation should not be zero nor a function of mass;such field could rather be a property of the space-time. The obvious expression for acceleration should be the derivative of the Hubble equation respect to time, which gives two opposed-signs terms whose substitution by the De-Sitter equation drives to a permanent negative acceleration, similarly to that obtained by the 2<sup>nd</sup> Friedmann equation. Otherwise, the inclusion of the ? term in the gravitational Einstein equation has led to a two opposed-signs terms expression, resembled to a non-published Newton equation. The negative term expresses the gravitational attraction and the positive one expresses the accelerated expansion as a ? function, which usually is attributed to dark energy. In this paper it is shown that Λ is proportional to the squared Hubble parameter and that the uncertain dark energy may be substituted by the calculable Hubble field intensity to obtain an equation for the net Universe acceleration. Equations for the Hubble parameter as functions of time and radius are also deduced. A relation is shown between the various assumed masses of the Universe and its critical radius. Additional Universe parameters are estimated such as the deceleration factor and a solution for the Poisson equation in the Hubble field. A brief comment t on high-standard candles is included.展开更多
<p> Observing galaxies receding from each other, Hubble found the universe’s expansion in 1929. His law that gives the receding speed as a function of distance implies a factor called Hubble constant <em>...<p> Observing galaxies receding from each other, Hubble found the universe’s expansion in 1929. His law that gives the receding speed as a function of distance implies a factor called Hubble constant <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub>. We want to validate our theoretical value of <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.09548580(32) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span></span>s<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></sup></span></span><sup>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span></span>1</sup> with a new cosmological model found in 2019. This model predicts what may look like two possible values of <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub>. According to this model, the correct equation of the apparent age of the universe gives ~ 14.14 billion years. In approximation, we get the well-known equation 1/<em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 13.56 billion years. When we force these ages to fit the 1/<em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> formula, it gives two different Hubble constant values of ~69.2 and 72.1 km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">sdot;</span></span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span></span>1</sup>. When we apply a theoretical correction factor of <em>η</em> ≈ 1.042516951 on the first value, both target the second one. We found 42 equations of <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> linking different physics constants. Some are used to measure <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> as a function of the average temperature<em> T</em> of the Cosmological Microwave Background and the universal gravitational constant <em>G</em>: </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.06(90) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<span style="vertical-align:super;white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span><sup>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup> from <em>T </em>by Cobra probe & Equation (16) </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 71.95(50) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1 </sup>from<em> T</em> by Partridge & Equation (16) </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.086(36) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-1 </span></span></span></sup>from <em>G</em> & Equation (34) </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.105(36) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup> from <em></em><em>G</em> & Equations (74), (75), or (76). With 508 published values, <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.0957 ± 0.33 km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup> seems to be the “ideal” statistical result. It validates our model and our theoretical <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> value which are useful to find various interactions with the different constants. Our model also explains the ambiguity between the different universe’s age measurements and seems to unlock a tension between two <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> values. </p>展开更多
With an initial requirement to make observations a minimum of 5–10 years,Hubble Space Telescope(HST)has continued to operate well for 30 years.It has relied upon five servicing missions to repair and replace essentia...With an initial requirement to make observations a minimum of 5–10 years,Hubble Space Telescope(HST)has continued to operate well for 30 years.It has relied upon five servicing missions to repair and replace essential components.Since the final Space Shuttle mission 10 years ago,it has avoided major breaks in its operation,with the only serious effects of aging in space being a progressive deterioration in the performance of the gyroscopes and sensitivity of the instrument detectors.A number of factors were important in making HST a scientific landmark.Ground-breaking discoveries have been made with HST-the most important being the discovery of cosmic acceleration.When HST operation ceases,future observations in space should be assured with successful operation of major missions now planned by NASA,ESA,and the Chinese and Japanese Space Agencies.展开更多
We constrain cosmological parameters using only Hubble parameter data and quantify the impact of future Hubble parameter measurements on parameter estimation for the most typical dark energy models. We first constrain...We constrain cosmological parameters using only Hubble parameter data and quantify the impact of future Hubble parameter measurements on parameter estimation for the most typical dark energy models. We first constrain cosmological parameters using 52 current Hubble parameter data including the Hubble constant measurement from the Hubble Space Telescope. Then we simulate the baryon acoustic oscillation signals from WFIRST(Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope) covering the redshift range of z ∈ [0.5, 2] and the redshift drift data from E-ELT(European Extremely Large Telescope) in the redshift range of z ∈ [2, 5]. It is shown that solely using the current Hubble parameter data could give fairly good constraints on cosmological parameters. Compared to the current Hubble parameter data, with the WFIRST observation the H(z) constraints on dark energy would be improved slightly, while with the E-ELT observation the H(z) constraints on dark energy is enormously improved.展开更多
We compare the Hubble diagram calculated from the observed redshift (RS)/magnitude (μ) data of 280 Supernovae in the RS range of z = 0.0104 to 8.1 with Hubble diagrams inferred on the basis of the exponential tired l...We compare the Hubble diagram calculated from the observed redshift (RS)/magnitude (μ) data of 280 Supernovae in the RS range of z = 0.0104 to 8.1 with Hubble diagrams inferred on the basis of the exponential tired light and the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) cosmological model. We show that the experimentally measured Hubble diagram follows clearly the exponential photon flight time (tS)/RS relation, whilst the data calculated on the basis of the ΛCDM model exhibit poor agreement with the observed data.展开更多
Purpose: To accurately derive H0 from subatomic constants in abscence of any standard astronomy data. Methods: Recent astronomical data have determined a value of Hubble’s constant to range from 76.9+3.9-3.4+10.0-8.0...Purpose: To accurately derive H0 from subatomic constants in abscence of any standard astronomy data. Methods: Recent astronomical data have determined a value of Hubble’s constant to range from 76.9+3.9-3.4+10.0-8.0 to 67.80 ± 0.77 (km/s)/Mpc. An innovative prediction of H0 is obtained from harmonic properties of the frequency equivalents of neutron, n0, in conjunction with the electron, e;the Bohr radius, α0;and the Rydberg constant, R. These represent integer natural unit sets. The neutron is converted from its frequency equivalent to a dimensionless constant,, where “h” = Planck’s constant, and “s” is measured in seconds. The fundamental frequency, Vf, is the first integer series set . All other atomic data are scaled to Vf as elements in a large, but a countable point set. The present value of H0 is derived and ΩM assumed to be 0. An accurate derivation of H0 is made using a unified power law. The integer set of the first twelve integers N12 {1,2,…,11,12}, and their harmonic fractions exponents of Vf represent the first generation of bosons and particles. Thepartial harmonic fraction, -3/4, is exponent of Vf which represents H0. The partial fraction 3/4 is associated with a component of neutron beta decay kinetic energy. Results: H0 is predicted utilizing a previously published line used to derive Planck time, tp. The power law line of the experimental H0 and tp conforms to the predicted line. Conclusions: H0 can be predicted from subatomic data related to the neutron and hydrogen.展开更多
Assessment of the Hubble parameter as an indicator of the expansion rate of the universe holds a central position in the field of astronomy. From its initial estimate of about 500 km<span style="white-space:no...Assessment of the Hubble parameter as an indicator of the expansion rate of the universe holds a central position in the field of astronomy. From its initial estimate of about 500 km<span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span>sec<sup>-1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span>parsc<sup>-1</sup>, this value had been steadily amended as the observational tools became more accurate and precise. Despite this, a gap remains between the value of observations relating to local and nonlocal estimations of the Hubble parameter that gave rise to what became known as the Hubble tension. This tension is addressed here while dealing with space fabric as a cosmological fluid that undergoes transition.展开更多
Based on an analysis of 280 Type SNIa supernovae and gamma-ray bursts redshifts in the range of z = 0.0104 - 8.1 the Hubble diagram is shown to follow a strictly exponential slope predicting an exponentially expanding...Based on an analysis of 280 Type SNIa supernovae and gamma-ray bursts redshifts in the range of z = 0.0104 - 8.1 the Hubble diagram is shown to follow a strictly exponential slope predicting an exponentially expanding or static universe. At redshifts > 2 - 3 ΛCDM models show a poor agreement with the observed data. Based on the results presented in this paper, the Hubble diagram test does not necessarily support the idea of expansion according to the big-bang concordance model.展开更多
General Relativity implies an expanding Universe from a singularity, the so-called Big Bang. The rate of expansion is the Hubble constant. There are two major ways of measuring the expansion of the Universe: through t...General Relativity implies an expanding Universe from a singularity, the so-called Big Bang. The rate of expansion is the Hubble constant. There are two major ways of measuring the expansion of the Universe: through the cosmic distance ladder and through looking at the signals originated from the beginning of the Universe. These two methods give quite different results for the Hubble constant. Hence, the Universe doesn’t expand. The solution to this problem is the theory of gravitation in flat space-time where space isn’t expanding. All the results of gravitation for weak fields of this theory agree with those of General Relativity to measurable accuracy whereas at the beginning of the Universe the results of both theories are quite different, i.e. no singularity by gravitation in flat space-time and non-expanding universe, and a Big Bang (singularity) by General Relativity.展开更多
Purpose: The cosmic microwave background radiation, CMB, is fundamental to observational cosmology, and is believed to be a remnant from the Big Bang. The CMB, Planck time, t<sub>P</sub>, and the Hubble co...Purpose: The cosmic microwave background radiation, CMB, is fundamental to observational cosmology, and is believed to be a remnant from the Big Bang. The CMB, Planck time, t<sub>P</sub>, and the Hubble constant, H<sub>0</sub>, are important cosmologic constants. The goal is to accurately derive and demonstrate the inter-relationships of the CMB peak spectral radiance frequency, t<sub>P</sub>, and H<sub>0</sub> from neutron and hydrogen quantum data only. Methods: The harmonic neutron hypothesis, HNH, evaluates physical phenomena within a finite consecutive integer and exponential power law harmonic fraction series that are scaled by a fundamental frequency of the neutron as the exponent base. The CMB and the H<sub>0</sub> are derived from a previously published method used to derive t<sub>P</sub>. Their associated integer exponents are respectively +1/2, −3/4, and −128/35. Results: Precise mathematical relationships of these three constants are demonstrated. All of the derived values are within their known observational values. The derived and known values are: ν<sub>CMB</sub>, 160.041737 (06) × 10<sup>9</sup> Hz, ~160 × 10<sup>9</sup> Hz;2.72519 K, 2.72548 ± 0.00057 K, H<sub>0</sub> 2.29726666 (11) × 10<sup>−18</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>, ~2.3 × 10<sup>−18</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>;and t<sub>P</sub> 5.3911418 (3) × 10<sup>−44</sup> s, 5.39106 (32) × 10<sup>−44</sup> s. Conclusion: The cosmic fundamental constants t<sub>P</sub>, H<sub>0</sub>, and CMB are mathematically inter-related constants all defined by gravity. They are also directly derivable from the quantum properties of the neutron and hydrogen within a harmonic power law.展开更多
The results of measurements of the Hubble constant H<sub>0</sub>, which characterizes the expansion rate of the universe, show that the values of H<sub>0</sub> vary significantly depending on M...The results of measurements of the Hubble constant H<sub>0</sub>, which characterizes the expansion rate of the universe, show that the values of H<sub>0</sub> vary significantly depending on Methodology. The disagreement in the values of H<sub>0</sub> obtained by the various teams far exceeds the standard uncertainties provided with the values. This discrepancy is called the Hubble Tension. In this paper, we discuss Macrostructures of the World (Superclusters and Galaxies);explain their Origin and Evolution in frames of the developed Hypersphere World-Universe Model (WUM), which is an alternative to the prevailing Big Bang Model (BBM) [1];and provide the explanation of the Hubble Tension. The main difference between WUM and BBM is: Instead of the Infinite Homogeneous and Isotropic Universe around the Initial Singularity in BBM, in WUM, the 3D Finite Boundless World (a Hypersphere) presents a Patchwork Quilt of different Luminous Superclusters (10<sup>3</sup>), which emerged in various places of the World at different Cosmological times. In WUM, the Medium of the World is Homogeneous and Isotropic. The distribution of Macroobjects in the World is spatially Inhomogeneous and Anisotropic and temporally Non-simultaneous.展开更多
In this work,we use the most recent publicly available type Ⅰa supernova(SNIa) compilations and H(z) data.A well formulated cosmological model based on Bianchi type Ⅰ(BI) metric is implemented in the presence of the...In this work,we use the most recent publicly available type Ⅰa supernova(SNIa) compilations and H(z) data.A well formulated cosmological model based on Bianchi type Ⅰ(BI) metric is implemented in the presence of the Ricci dark energy model.Using the maximum likelihood technique,we estimate the present value of Hubble's constant H_(0)=70.339±0.743,matter density parameter Ω_(m_(0))=0.297±0.031,anisotropy parameter Ω_(σ_(0))=-0.004 01 ± 0.001 07 within 1σ′ confidence level by bounding our derived model with recent joint Pantheon and H(z)data.We have constrained the present value of the equation of state parameter as ω_(de)=-1.17 joint with the observational data.The present value of the deceleration parameter of the Universe in the derived model is obtained as q_(0)=-0.749_(-0.086)^(+0.076).Transition redshift is also derived as z_(tr)~0.551 with the recent observations(Pantheon+H(z)) datasets.Finally,we compare the anisotropy effects on the evolution of H(z) for the proposed model under consideration with different observational datasets.展开更多
文摘In this article we present a model of Hubble-Lemaître law using the notions of a transmitter (galaxy) and a receiver (MW) coupled to a model of the universe (Slow Bang Model, SB), based on a quantum approach of the evolution of space-time as well as an equation of state that retains all the infinitesimal terms. We find an explanation of the Hubble tension H<sub>0</sub>. Indeed, we have seen that this constant depends on the transceiver pair which can vary from the lowest observable value, from photons of the CMB (theoretical [km/s/Mpc]) to increasingly higher values depending on the earlier origin of the formation of the observed galaxy or cluster (ETG ~0.3 [Gy], ~74 [km/s/Mpc]). We have produced a theoretical table of the values of the constant according to the possible pairs of transmitter/receiver in the case where these galaxies follow the Hubble flow without large disturbance. The calculated theoretical values of the constant are in the order of magnitude of all values mentioned in past studies. Subsequently, we applied the models to 9 galaxies and COMA cluster and found that the models predict acceptable values of their distances and Hubble constant since these galaxies mainly follow the Hubble flow rather than the effects of a galaxy cluster or a group of clusters. In conclusion, we affirm that this Hubble tension does not really exist and it is rather the understanding of the meaning of this constant that is questioned.
文摘It is generally accepted that the history of the expansion of the universe can be exactly described by the concordance model, which makes specific predictions about the shape of the Hubble diagram. The redshift-magnitude Hubble diagram in the redshift range z = 0.0104 - 1 seems to confirm this expectation, and it is believed that this conformity is also valid in the high redshift range. However, this belief is not undisputed. Recent work in the high redshift range of up to z = 8.1 has shown that the shape of the Hubble diagram deviates considerably from the predictions made by the Lambda cold dark matter model. These analyses, however, were based on mixed SN1a and gamma ray burst data, and some astronomers argue that this may have biased the results. In this paper, 109 cosmology-independent, calibrated gamma ray burst z/μdata points are used to calculate the Hubble diagram in the range z = 0.034 to z = 8.1. The outcome of this analysis confirms prior results: contrary to expectations, the shape of the Hubble diagram turns out to be exponential, and this is difficult to explain within the framework of the standard model. The cosmological implications of this unexpected result are discussed.
文摘This paper discusses the “Hubble constant measurement—mystery”. Independent measurements of this cosmic parameter, referred to as <i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">H</span></i><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> in abbreviated form, have all led to different values, with the highest value ≈ 74 km<span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>s</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>Mpc</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> and the lowest ≈ 67 km<span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>s</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;white-space:normal;background-color:#FFFFFF;">·</span>Mpc</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">, where km denotes kilometer, s second and Mpc</span><sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-1</span></sup><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> megaparsec. These measurements have mainly been obtained with space telescopes. Apparently, up to now there was no way to explain the differences. However, previously published studies seem to regard the problem of the different measurement results for </span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">H</span></i><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> [</span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><a href="#ref1">1</a>,</span><b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> </span></b><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><a href="#ref2">2</a></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;">]. I have shown that due to a symmetrical expansion of the Minkowski space (SMS), each respective frame of reference for an observer, who rests in the zero point of the frame, is converted into a state of apparent rest relative to the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation. This SMS-relativistic effect also seems to be responsible for the different measurement results of the Hubble constant, especially through space telescopes.</span>
文摘The Hubble equation was considered valid enough to calculate the recession velocity of galaxies, until further observations showed that there would be an accelerated recession in the Hubble flow, necessarily tied to an accelerated expansion of the Universe. So, this paper postulates the existence of a Hubble field as a possible cause for such an accelerated expansion, with some conditions: it must be a scalar field whose intensity should be a constant in respect to distance and whose Poisson equation should not be zero nor a function of mass;such field could rather be a property of the space-time. The obvious expression for acceleration should be the derivative of the Hubble equation respect to time, which gives two opposed-signs terms whose substitution by the De-Sitter equation drives to a permanent negative acceleration, similarly to that obtained by the 2<sup>nd</sup> Friedmann equation. Otherwise, the inclusion of the ? term in the gravitational Einstein equation has led to a two opposed-signs terms expression, resembled to a non-published Newton equation. The negative term expresses the gravitational attraction and the positive one expresses the accelerated expansion as a ? function, which usually is attributed to dark energy. In this paper it is shown that Λ is proportional to the squared Hubble parameter and that the uncertain dark energy may be substituted by the calculable Hubble field intensity to obtain an equation for the net Universe acceleration. Equations for the Hubble parameter as functions of time and radius are also deduced. A relation is shown between the various assumed masses of the Universe and its critical radius. Additional Universe parameters are estimated such as the deceleration factor and a solution for the Poisson equation in the Hubble field. A brief comment t on high-standard candles is included.
文摘<p> Observing galaxies receding from each other, Hubble found the universe’s expansion in 1929. His law that gives the receding speed as a function of distance implies a factor called Hubble constant <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub>. We want to validate our theoretical value of <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.09548580(32) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span></span>s<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></sup></span></span><sup>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span></span>1</sup> with a new cosmological model found in 2019. This model predicts what may look like two possible values of <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub>. According to this model, the correct equation of the apparent age of the universe gives ~ 14.14 billion years. In approximation, we get the well-known equation 1/<em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 13.56 billion years. When we force these ages to fit the 1/<em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> formula, it gives two different Hubble constant values of ~69.2 and 72.1 km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span><span style="white-space:nowrap;">sdot;</span></span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span></span>1</sup>. When we apply a theoretical correction factor of <em>η</em> ≈ 1.042516951 on the first value, both target the second one. We found 42 equations of <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> linking different physics constants. Some are used to measure <em style="white-space:normal;">H</em><sub style="white-space:normal;"><em>0</em></sub> as a function of the average temperature<em> T</em> of the Cosmological Microwave Background and the universal gravitational constant <em>G</em>: </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.06(90) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<span style="vertical-align:super;white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span><sup>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup> from <em>T </em>by Cobra probe & Equation (16) </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 71.95(50) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1 </sup>from<em> T</em> by Partridge & Equation (16) </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.086(36) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-1 </span></span></span></sup>from <em>G</em> & Equation (34) </p> <p> <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.105(36) km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup> from <em></em><em>G</em> & Equations (74), (75), or (76). With 508 published values, <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> ≈ 72.0957 ± 0.33 km<span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>s<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span></span></span></span>MParsec<sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;"><span style="white-space:nowrap;">-</span></span></span>1</sup> seems to be the “ideal” statistical result. It validates our model and our theoretical <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> value which are useful to find various interactions with the different constants. Our model also explains the ambiguity between the different universe’s age measurements and seems to unlock a tension between two <em>H</em><sub><em>0</em></sub> values. </p>
文摘With an initial requirement to make observations a minimum of 5–10 years,Hubble Space Telescope(HST)has continued to operate well for 30 years.It has relied upon five servicing missions to repair and replace essential components.Since the final Space Shuttle mission 10 years ago,it has avoided major breaks in its operation,with the only serious effects of aging in space being a progressive deterioration in the performance of the gyroscopes and sensitivity of the instrument detectors.A number of factors were important in making HST a scientific landmark.Ground-breaking discoveries have been made with HST-the most important being the discovery of cosmic acceleration.When HST operation ceases,future observations in space should be assured with successful operation of major missions now planned by NASA,ESA,and the Chinese and Japanese Space Agencies.
基金Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos.11522540,11690021,11375153,11675145the National Program for Support of Top-Notch Young Professionalsthe 2016 Program for Postdoctoral Fellowship of Zhejiang Province
文摘We constrain cosmological parameters using only Hubble parameter data and quantify the impact of future Hubble parameter measurements on parameter estimation for the most typical dark energy models. We first constrain cosmological parameters using 52 current Hubble parameter data including the Hubble constant measurement from the Hubble Space Telescope. Then we simulate the baryon acoustic oscillation signals from WFIRST(Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope) covering the redshift range of z ∈ [0.5, 2] and the redshift drift data from E-ELT(European Extremely Large Telescope) in the redshift range of z ∈ [2, 5]. It is shown that solely using the current Hubble parameter data could give fairly good constraints on cosmological parameters. Compared to the current Hubble parameter data, with the WFIRST observation the H(z) constraints on dark energy would be improved slightly, while with the E-ELT observation the H(z) constraints on dark energy is enormously improved.
文摘We compare the Hubble diagram calculated from the observed redshift (RS)/magnitude (μ) data of 280 Supernovae in the RS range of z = 0.0104 to 8.1 with Hubble diagrams inferred on the basis of the exponential tired light and the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (ΛCDM) cosmological model. We show that the experimentally measured Hubble diagram follows clearly the exponential photon flight time (tS)/RS relation, whilst the data calculated on the basis of the ΛCDM model exhibit poor agreement with the observed data.
文摘Purpose: To accurately derive H0 from subatomic constants in abscence of any standard astronomy data. Methods: Recent astronomical data have determined a value of Hubble’s constant to range from 76.9+3.9-3.4+10.0-8.0 to 67.80 ± 0.77 (km/s)/Mpc. An innovative prediction of H0 is obtained from harmonic properties of the frequency equivalents of neutron, n0, in conjunction with the electron, e;the Bohr radius, α0;and the Rydberg constant, R. These represent integer natural unit sets. The neutron is converted from its frequency equivalent to a dimensionless constant,, where “h” = Planck’s constant, and “s” is measured in seconds. The fundamental frequency, Vf, is the first integer series set . All other atomic data are scaled to Vf as elements in a large, but a countable point set. The present value of H0 is derived and ΩM assumed to be 0. An accurate derivation of H0 is made using a unified power law. The integer set of the first twelve integers N12 {1,2,…,11,12}, and their harmonic fractions exponents of Vf represent the first generation of bosons and particles. Thepartial harmonic fraction, -3/4, is exponent of Vf which represents H0. The partial fraction 3/4 is associated with a component of neutron beta decay kinetic energy. Results: H0 is predicted utilizing a previously published line used to derive Planck time, tp. The power law line of the experimental H0 and tp conforms to the predicted line. Conclusions: H0 can be predicted from subatomic data related to the neutron and hydrogen.
文摘Assessment of the Hubble parameter as an indicator of the expansion rate of the universe holds a central position in the field of astronomy. From its initial estimate of about 500 km<span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span>sec<sup>-1</sup><span style="white-space:nowrap;">⋅</span>parsc<sup>-1</sup>, this value had been steadily amended as the observational tools became more accurate and precise. Despite this, a gap remains between the value of observations relating to local and nonlocal estimations of the Hubble parameter that gave rise to what became known as the Hubble tension. This tension is addressed here while dealing with space fabric as a cosmological fluid that undergoes transition.
文摘Based on an analysis of 280 Type SNIa supernovae and gamma-ray bursts redshifts in the range of z = 0.0104 - 8.1 the Hubble diagram is shown to follow a strictly exponential slope predicting an exponentially expanding or static universe. At redshifts > 2 - 3 ΛCDM models show a poor agreement with the observed data. Based on the results presented in this paper, the Hubble diagram test does not necessarily support the idea of expansion according to the big-bang concordance model.
文摘General Relativity implies an expanding Universe from a singularity, the so-called Big Bang. The rate of expansion is the Hubble constant. There are two major ways of measuring the expansion of the Universe: through the cosmic distance ladder and through looking at the signals originated from the beginning of the Universe. These two methods give quite different results for the Hubble constant. Hence, the Universe doesn’t expand. The solution to this problem is the theory of gravitation in flat space-time where space isn’t expanding. All the results of gravitation for weak fields of this theory agree with those of General Relativity to measurable accuracy whereas at the beginning of the Universe the results of both theories are quite different, i.e. no singularity by gravitation in flat space-time and non-expanding universe, and a Big Bang (singularity) by General Relativity.
文摘Purpose: The cosmic microwave background radiation, CMB, is fundamental to observational cosmology, and is believed to be a remnant from the Big Bang. The CMB, Planck time, t<sub>P</sub>, and the Hubble constant, H<sub>0</sub>, are important cosmologic constants. The goal is to accurately derive and demonstrate the inter-relationships of the CMB peak spectral radiance frequency, t<sub>P</sub>, and H<sub>0</sub> from neutron and hydrogen quantum data only. Methods: The harmonic neutron hypothesis, HNH, evaluates physical phenomena within a finite consecutive integer and exponential power law harmonic fraction series that are scaled by a fundamental frequency of the neutron as the exponent base. The CMB and the H<sub>0</sub> are derived from a previously published method used to derive t<sub>P</sub>. Their associated integer exponents are respectively +1/2, −3/4, and −128/35. Results: Precise mathematical relationships of these three constants are demonstrated. All of the derived values are within their known observational values. The derived and known values are: ν<sub>CMB</sub>, 160.041737 (06) × 10<sup>9</sup> Hz, ~160 × 10<sup>9</sup> Hz;2.72519 K, 2.72548 ± 0.00057 K, H<sub>0</sub> 2.29726666 (11) × 10<sup>−18</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>, ~2.3 × 10<sup>−18</sup> s<sup>−1</sup>;and t<sub>P</sub> 5.3911418 (3) × 10<sup>−44</sup> s, 5.39106 (32) × 10<sup>−44</sup> s. Conclusion: The cosmic fundamental constants t<sub>P</sub>, H<sub>0</sub>, and CMB are mathematically inter-related constants all defined by gravity. They are also directly derivable from the quantum properties of the neutron and hydrogen within a harmonic power law.
文摘The results of measurements of the Hubble constant H<sub>0</sub>, which characterizes the expansion rate of the universe, show that the values of H<sub>0</sub> vary significantly depending on Methodology. The disagreement in the values of H<sub>0</sub> obtained by the various teams far exceeds the standard uncertainties provided with the values. This discrepancy is called the Hubble Tension. In this paper, we discuss Macrostructures of the World (Superclusters and Galaxies);explain their Origin and Evolution in frames of the developed Hypersphere World-Universe Model (WUM), which is an alternative to the prevailing Big Bang Model (BBM) [1];and provide the explanation of the Hubble Tension. The main difference between WUM and BBM is: Instead of the Infinite Homogeneous and Isotropic Universe around the Initial Singularity in BBM, in WUM, the 3D Finite Boundless World (a Hypersphere) presents a Patchwork Quilt of different Luminous Superclusters (10<sup>3</sup>), which emerged in various places of the World at different Cosmological times. In WUM, the Medium of the World is Homogeneous and Isotropic. The distribution of Macroobjects in the World is spatially Inhomogeneous and Anisotropic and temporally Non-simultaneous.
文摘In this work,we use the most recent publicly available type Ⅰa supernova(SNIa) compilations and H(z) data.A well formulated cosmological model based on Bianchi type Ⅰ(BI) metric is implemented in the presence of the Ricci dark energy model.Using the maximum likelihood technique,we estimate the present value of Hubble's constant H_(0)=70.339±0.743,matter density parameter Ω_(m_(0))=0.297±0.031,anisotropy parameter Ω_(σ_(0))=-0.004 01 ± 0.001 07 within 1σ′ confidence level by bounding our derived model with recent joint Pantheon and H(z)data.We have constrained the present value of the equation of state parameter as ω_(de)=-1.17 joint with the observational data.The present value of the deceleration parameter of the Universe in the derived model is obtained as q_(0)=-0.749_(-0.086)^(+0.076).Transition redshift is also derived as z_(tr)~0.551 with the recent observations(Pantheon+H(z)) datasets.Finally,we compare the anisotropy effects on the evolution of H(z) for the proposed model under consideration with different observational datasets.
